Agenda item

(Report by Mr M Whiting, Cabinet Member for Education, Learning and Skills (ELS) and Mr P Leeson, Corporate Director for Education, Learning and Skills)

1.               The Chairman invited Mr Whiting and Mr Leeson to give their verbal updates.  Mr Whiting began by advising Members on the following:

·       Academies - 100 Kent schools had now converted to academy status and a further 25 schools were in the process of converting.

·       Kent Test - Work was progressing on the Kent Test Consultations.  Earlier this year a review of the Kent Test was carried out by Headteachers at the request of the Cabinet Member for ELS.  A range of proposals had come forward that may form the basis for change.  KCC would be consulting with schools in Kent and with neighbouring authorities shortly before a formal tendering process for delivering any new testing arrangements.  The successful company would supply the Kent testing material to those students sitting the test in September 2014. Further information would be provided to the Cabinet Committee as the procurement process continued.

·       Commissioning Plan – The Cabinet Member for ELS had written to the District Leaders to request that Locality Boards and Member Panels to take an active interest in reviewing that part of the Commissioning Plan pertaining to their district to gain vital local knowledge to meet the needs of the locality.  KCC had published the first reiteration of the Kent Commissioning Plan for Education.  It was planned that the Commissioning Plan be reviewed every 6 months and updated fully and reissued each October. The progress of the meetings in the districts and Locality Boards would be reported back to this Cabinet Committee.  The first meeting would be held with Sevenoaks District Council.

·       Kent Special Educational Needs Strategy – Work was being carried out to produce a new Kent SEN Strategy and this would be submitted to this Cabinet Committee in the Spring of 2013.  The Kent SEN Strategy was timely as KCC faced an increase in referrals for special provision and funding for places in independent schools.  The aim was to look where capacity could be created in Kent schools through commissioning additional special school places.  The new SEN Code of Practise was expected shortly following the publication of the government’s green paper in 2011.

·       Kent Schools Admission Codes – The Admissions Codes for Primary and Secondary schools for September 2014were going out for consultation next week. The Cabinet Member would welcome comments from Members and all sections of the community during the consultation. 

2.               Mr Leeson gave his verbal update and advised Members on the following:-

·       Ofsted Inspections – [Since September 2012 a revised Ofsted inspection Framework was implemented].  22 schools in Kent had been inspected, 17 primary and 3 secondary, 1 special school and 1 Pupil Referral Unit.  Only 56% of Kent’s primary schools were good or outstanding, which needed to improve significantly for the future.  Approximately 70% of secondary schools were good or outstanding.  Nearly all special schools were judged to be good or outstanding and approximately half of the Pupil Referral Units were good or outstanding.  Recent inspections show a good improvement rate from what was called “satisfactory” [now called “requiring improvement”] to good.

·       Of the 17 primary schools that were inspected since September; 10 were rated as “good schools, 5 were judged as requiring improvement and 2 were placed in special measurers. The 3 secondary schools inspected under the Pupil Referral Unit improved from satisfactory to be judged as good.  The special school inspection was also judged as a good school.  Mr Leeson said that this was a good trend of schools moving from satisfactory to being good schools.  He explained that the journey from “requiring improvement” to being judged a good school had happened with the schools working with KCC.  This had been achieved through a range of training opportunities being offered to schools on the new Inspection Framework used by Ofsted.  Also the quality of teaching had been improved and was consistent.  The schools were tracking and monitoring their pupils’ progress to demonstrate to Ofsted, when being inspected, the progress being made by their pupils.  This would continue to be monitored and reported back to this Cabinet Committee on a regular basis.

·       Key Stage 1(KS1) - There was a narrowing of the gapat level 2 and above at KS1 in 2012.  Kent was still above the national average figure or wider than the national gap at KS1.  The gaps became wider as the children got older if the right strategies were not employed.  KCC had to do all that it could to ensure that that gap was minimised and decreased over time.

·       Key Stage 2 (KS2) – There was a significant narrowing of the gap at KS2 in 2012.  The national gap at KS2 was 20% between level 4 outcomes in English and Maths for pupils on free school meals and other pupils.  In Kent that had narrowed to 22%, close to the national gap. Kent needed to ensure that it was less than the national gap, meaning that Kent would be able to say that Kent was doing better for children in Kent on free school meals than was the case nationally.  In 2012 the gap has narrowed from 27% in 2011 to 22% in 2012, which Mr Leeson considered a significant reduction in the gap overall for Kent at KS2.  This was the result of a number of focussed pieces of work in most schools in Kent using nationally recognised tools including the Sutton Trust Learning that helped schools to understand what the most effective strategies were for narrowing gaps between groups of pupils.  Those strategies included focused teaching in small groups, one to one support, a determination to focus on literacy, good assessment practise with good monitoring and tracking of progress in schools which helped the schools to know better what was happening for different pupils and what more could be done for them to support their progress.

3.               Members were given the opportunity to make comments and ask questions which included the following:-

a)    In response to a question regarding siblings, Mr Leeson advised that there was a National Admissions Code that KCC had to abide by.  One of the priorities in the Code was that siblings were given priority in the admission to school.  However, there was also local discretion given on distance travelled to school and those change overtime depending on what was happening with local demography and travel patterns to the school etc.  Those were issues that could be looked at during a local review but the local authority had to abide by the Admissions Code.

b)    In reply to a question, Mr Leeson advised that of those schools that had already converted to academy status; 69 were secondary schools and 31 were primary schools.  27 primary schools were in the process of converting to academy status. Mr Leeson agreed to supply a list of those schools converting to academy status.

c)     In response to a question, Mr Leeson advised that the improvements Kent was seeing in standards across primary and secondary schools was the result of a systematic, clearly thought out, well targeted, School Improvement Strategy for Kent.  The services were being effective about change, supporting schools to focus on the right strategies to improve teaching and pupil progress and the kind of school leadership that needed to be in place in order to bring that about.  The Strategy was considered to be challenging in the right way; about best practise, expectations and the most effective kind of school leadership needed in all schools to bring around educational outcomes.  He considered that it was about improving progress for every pupil in every school.

d)              In reply to a comment, Mr Leeson agreed to investigate whether some Kent schools had increase their Published Admission Number in the recently published School Admissions Code book before the consultations had been completed and the decisions taken.

e)              Members welcomed the 6 monthly review of the Commissioning Plan.

f)                In response to a request, Mr Leeson agreed to provide information to the Cabinet Committee on the number of apprenticeships and data on the destinations of apprentices on a regular basis.  The Leader of the County Council, Mr Carter, added that a time limited Select Committee was due to be set up to look at the outcomes of apprenticeships.

g)              Concern was raised on the cost of school converting to academy status. Members were advised that nationally the County Councils could not recoup the money paid out to convert a school.  The school received £25 000 to convert. KCC continued to protest about the considerable cost regarding the property, staffing and budget to the Secretary of State.

h)               In reply to a question, Mr Leeson advised that there were County Councillors who sat on academies governing boards. He agreed to forward a list of those Members outside of the meeting.  Mr Leeson also agreed to circulate the list of academies that KCC was co sponsor for.

i)                 In response to a request, Mr Whiting agreed to submit a report to the 18 January meeting of this Cabinet Committee on the proposals for the Kent Test.

j)                 In reply to a question, Mr Leeson advised that there was data to prove that there was no correlation between the state of a school building and the quality of learning.  Overall it was the quality of teaching which was key and this could not be achieved without good leadership and attention to the individual pupils.  Evidence on what accelerates progress for pupils was to be shared.

4.               RESOLVED that the responses to comments and requests by Members and the verbal updates be noted.